Skip to main content

Table 7 Comparison of results between KISTEC method and proposed method

From: Structural Safety Inspection of Reinforced Concrete Structures Considering Failure Probabilities of Structural Members

Case

Member

Strength ratio

Member grade (score)

β

Ultimate limit state load

Evaluation grade (score)

KISTEC

Proposed method

1–1

Column

1.11

A(1)

3.69

1.2D + 1.6L

B (3.40)

C (5.15)

Girder

1.11

A(1)

4.30

Beam

1.11

A(1)

4.30

Slab

0.67

E(9)

0.94

1–2

Column

1.11

A(1)

3.12

1.2D + 1.0 W + 1.0L

C (5.62)

Girder

1.11

A(1)

3.68

Beam

1.11

A(1)

3.68

Slab

0.67

E(9)

0.26

1–3

Column

1.11

A(1)

3.16

1.2D + 1.0E + 1.0L

C (5.55)

Girder

1.11

A(1)

3.71

Beam

1.11

A(1)

3.71

Slab

0.67

E(9)

0.37

2–1

Column

1.11

A(1)

3.69

1.2D + 1.6L

C (5.51)

D (6.90)

Girder

1.11

A(1)

4.30

Beam

0.80

D(7)

2.79

Slab

0.67

E(9)

0.94

2–2

Column

1.11

A(1)

3.12

1.2D + 1.0 W + 1.0L

D (7.44)

Girder

1.11

A(1)

3.68

Beam

0.80

D(7)

2.00

Slab

0.67

E(9)

0.26

2–3

Column

1.11

A(1)

3.16

1.2D + 1.0E + 1.0L

D (7.38)

Girder

1.11

A(1)

3.71

Beam

0.80

D(7)

2.06

Slab

0.67

E(9)

0.37

3–1

Column

1.11

A(1)

3.69

1.2D + 1.6L

B (3.61)

B (3.86)

Girder

1.11

A(1)

4.30

Beam

0.91

C(5)

3.42

Slab

0.91

C(5)

2.21

3–2

Column

1.11

A(1)

3.12

1.2D + 1.0 W + 1.0L

C (4.17)

Girder

1.11

A(1)

3.68

Beam

0.91

C(5)

2.69

Slab

0.91

C(5)

1.65

3–3

Column

1.11

A(1)

3.16

1.2D + 1.0E + 1.0L

C (4.15)

Girder

1.11

A(1)

3.71

Beam

0.91

C(5)

2.74

Slab

0.91

C(5)

1.72

4–1

Column

1.11

A(1)

3.69

1.2D + 1.6L

C (4.91)

C (5.70)

Girder

1.11

A(1)

4.30

Beam

0.80

D(7)

2.79

Slab

0.80

D(7)

1.72

4–2

Column

1.11

A(1)

3.12

1.2D + 1.0 W + 1.0L

D (6.16)

Girder

1.11

A(1)

3.68

Beam

0.80

D(7)

2.00

Slab

0.80

D(7)

1.11

4–3

Column

1.11

A(1)

3.16

1.2D + 1.0E + 1.0L

D (6.12)

Girder

1.11

A(1)

3.71

Beam

0.80

D(7)

2.06

Slab

0.80

D(7)

1.19